I'm helpless, in a lot of ways. I'm not proud of that fact, but at the same time, I think it's kind of endearing? I think that what I really need, is the kind of woman who can take me in hand, and shape me into the kind of man capable of realizing that he needs a woman who can take him in hand and shape him into the kind of man who can realize that. If I had that, then I think that both of us would be completely and totally happy. We would have to be happy. Just by definition. That would already be what we both want.
And yet...could we be satisfied with that? I think it's the nature of being human, unfortunately, to be satisfied with less that what we might be able to reach if we tried just a little harder...either that, or to never be satisfied with whatever we get, to always be looking beyond, to the next empty accomplishment in a never-ending series. It can't be both! Those are two mutually-exclusive deals. Gotta be one or the other. Human nature.
Or neither, of course. Can't ignore the ol' null option!
Ultimately, when two people, separated by a great distance (but on the same side of the Earth, otherwise the point is void) look up at the full moon, haloed, gliding behind a milky screen of clouds...ultimately, they are both looking at the same moon. They are just looking at it through different clouds. And when they look up and say, "look at the moon, see how beautiful it is," - why is that? What makes it beautiful? Why does the human eye look at that, and see beauty? Is it because it's round? Is it because it's blotchy, the moon-blotches form some sort of subliminally-pleasing pattern? Is it because of the light?
I think it's because of the light. I think that we love light; I think we love it all the more when night has covered the Earth in darkness.
...
I just read all of that again, and I'm sorry, but what a lot of horse shit. I apologize deeply, on my own behalf and on yours as well. In fact, why did you even read this far?
And yet...could we be satisfied with that? I think it's the nature of being human, unfortunately, to be satisfied with less that what we might be able to reach if we tried just a little harder...either that, or to never be satisfied with whatever we get, to always be looking beyond, to the next empty accomplishment in a never-ending series. It can't be both! Those are two mutually-exclusive deals. Gotta be one or the other. Human nature.
Or neither, of course. Can't ignore the ol' null option!
Ultimately, when two people, separated by a great distance (but on the same side of the Earth, otherwise the point is void) look up at the full moon, haloed, gliding behind a milky screen of clouds...ultimately, they are both looking at the same moon. They are just looking at it through different clouds. And when they look up and say, "look at the moon, see how beautiful it is," - why is that? What makes it beautiful? Why does the human eye look at that, and see beauty? Is it because it's round? Is it because it's blotchy, the moon-blotches form some sort of subliminally-pleasing pattern? Is it because of the light?
I think it's because of the light. I think that we love light; I think we love it all the more when night has covered the Earth in darkness.
...
I just read all of that again, and I'm sorry, but what a lot of horse shit. I apologize deeply, on my own behalf and on yours as well. In fact, why did you even read this far?
Comments